Raw LLM Responses

I think any artist claiming they deserve royalties from creating one of the millions of scraped images is just asinine. For one, there's no way to prove that without the AI specifically listing its database, but let's pretend for a second. If Lensa can make 100 images for $4 and said artist drew one of the million scraped pictures, they would be entitled to _0.00000004 cents._ Also in regards to consent, if you have the image available online to be viewed by anyone with eyeballs then that argument falls flat. If a Google Image search can find your picture, then it's available for a webscraper to see and learn from. Saying the machine learning isn't the same as human inspiration is also disingenuous, because while the AI doesn't have the level of nuance of human brains, it needs waaaaayyy more reference input to generate something even _approaching_ similar. You could come up with a new word fairly easily since you've encountered them your entire life, but a computer model literally starts with nothing and would need to scan through millions of words to understand what one is. That being said the ability to feed in custom references _does_ pose a lot of legal and ethical issues, but that's on the people using the AI and not the AI itself. It's a tool, and it's on the user to be responsible with it.